Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited (IDC) v Roscher and Others (JR2946/10) [2017] ZALCJHB 156 (12 May 2017)
The court found that, although the explanation for the delay in filing written submissions was not entirely satisfactory, the primary cause related to the actions of the deceased attorney and subsequent difficulties in retrieving the file. Given the complexity and public importance of the matter, and the reasonable...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] ZALCJHB 156
- Parties
- Applicant: Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited (IDC); Respondent: Tracey Lucille Roscher; Respondent: Eric Myhill N.O.; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- JR2946/10
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Review
- Outcome
- Condonation for late filing granted; leave to appeal granted; costs to be costs in the appeal.
- Judges
- Howes
- Legal Topics
- Condonation of Late Filing, Leave to Appeal, Review of Arbitration Award, Substantive Fairness of Dismissal
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited (IDC)
Applicant
Tracey Lucille Roscher
Respondent
Eric Myhill N.O.
Respondent
Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the First Respondent's written submissions.
- 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the judgment setting aside the arbitration award and finding the dismissal substantively fair.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, although the explanation for the delay in filing written submissions was not entirely satisfactory, the primary cause related to the actions of the deceased attorney and subsequent difficulties in retrieving the file. Given the complexity and public importance of the matter, and the reasonable prospects that another court may reach a different conclusion, condonation for the late filing was granted. Leave to appeal was also granted in the interests of justice.
Court Disposition
Condonation for late filing granted; leave to appeal granted; costs to be costs in the appeal.
Orders
- Condonation for the late filing of the First Respondent's written submissions is granted.
- The application for leave to appeal is granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
Not Reportable
Case no: JR2946/10
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMITED (IDC) Applicant and TRACEY LUCILLE ROSCHER First Respondent ERIC MYHILL N.O. COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION Second Respondent Third Respondent
Decided: In chambers
Judgment: 12 May 2017
Summary: Leave to appeal –– application for leave to appeal granted.
RULING ON LEAVE TO APPEAL
HOWES, AJ
Introduction
[1] This is an application for leave to appeal in respect of the whole of the judgment and order handed down by the Honourable Court on 2 August 2016. In terms of the judgment, the Applicant’s review application was successful, and the arbitration award issued by the Third Respondent was set aside and replaced with an award that the dismissal of the First Respondent was substantively fair.
[2] The First Respondent seeks leave to appeal the judgment, and also seeks condonation for the late filing of her written submissions. The Applicant opposes the application for leave to appeal and the application for condonation.
[3] While the delay in serving and filing the written submissions is significant (some 60 days), an explanation of sorts is provided for the delay. It appears that a material portion of the delay is submitted to have been occasioned as a result of the untimely death of Mr Anthony Hinds, the First Respondent’s initial attorney of record. Thereafter the delay is further explained as a result of the First Respondent’s attempts to secure her file from the offices of Mr Hinds, due to inter alia a fee dispute.
[4] I have to agree with the Applicant that there are certainly aspects of the First Respondent’s explanation that are lacking, but as the primary explanation relates to action or inaction of the late Mr Hinds and Mr Hinds’ offices, it is unlikely that the First Respondent could have provided a more detailed explanation for that period. While there are periods of the delay which are not properly explained, in the exercise of my discretion and given my views relating to the complexities of this matter and the merits of the application for leave to appeal, I condone the delay.
[5] Having carefully considered the application for leave to appeal, and the submissions filed by both parties, I am persuaded that there are reasonable prospects that another court may reach a different conclusion on appeal. Furthermore, this matter is of considerable
factual and legal complexity, it is voluminious in nature and it is of some public importance, as it involves a publicly-funded employer, faced with a retrospective reinstatement order in respect of a senior and highly paid employee. In my view, it would be in the interests of justice to grant leave to appeal.
Order:
1. Condonation for the late filing of the First Respondent’s written submissions, is granted.
2. The application for leave to appeal is granted.
3. Costs of this application are to be costs in the appeal.
__________________
Howes, AJ
Acting Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa